GatewayRedbirds.com

If your dad is not wealthy, he's not likely to have any impact on the capital gains tax between the two candidates. McCain wants to keep the highest rate at 15%. Obama wants to raise it to ~20% for only the wealthiest individuals. So if your dad doesn't fall into that category which he evidently does not fall into based on what you've said, neither candidate is likely to be better or worse for you (or your dad) on that issue.

lets take a moment to enjoy some music from sarah

[/youtube]

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:McCain's POW experience simply can't be overlooked. True, it doesn't make him more or less qualified to be President. It does, however, show that the man is honorable (despite his current campaign actions) and when he chose to stay with his comrades instead of going home when given the chance, that, imo, speaks volumes for his character....more so than a campaign.

Have you guys heard the "smear" on that record? Not what the Obama camp is saying but what anti-McCainites are saying?

He supposedly gave out a lot of very classified information as a POW. And, when it came time to release prisoners, the ones that cooperated were the first to go. He was given the opportunity to leave early, being one who cooperated, but was told by someone here at home that he shouldn't leave because of his father's position and that it would be known that he cooperated if he was one of the first ones out.

Not sure how much, if any, of it is true but it's being circulated (in much greater detail).

pop_haines wrote:

Fat Strat wrote:

Would you make the country safe from higher capital gains and estate tax at the expense of a larger national debt?

One of the foundations of McCain's campaign is cutting government spending. The idea is to cut spending, cut taxes across the board, and when the economy grows because more people have more money to spend, they typically spend more, and then the government makes more as well.

The elephant in the room is military spending.

Not social programs and infrastructure.

I won't disagree with that and my little theoretical statement didn't specify what should get cut or by how much. But, I also won't hold McCain (or Obama for that matter) responsible for the budgets and the spending over the last eight years (in response to someone else's comments). My biggest disappointment with Bush has been the increase in spending during the '00's.

thats a lot to rebutt on AWvsCBsteeeerike3. I'll give you credit for being rational. Not many people think it out, and base it all on appearance, hearsay etc.

McCain's POW experience simply can't be overlooked...His military experience is well documented and, despite how I feel about the war, I trust him more to run a military campaign than I do Obama.

True, the guy is a hero and appears more credible on military matters than the current president. My obvious disagreement with McCain is his overemphasis on military solutions. It seems like his committment to Iraq is because he feels bad about how Vietnam ended up, more so than Iraq War is a solution to fighting terrorism. The grand dream of making Iraq into a US-friendly democracy in the mideast is a bit naive. I'm a pessimist, Iraq's been a [expletive] hole for a long time. It won't be pretty when we leave, but let it go.

Your energy thoughts. I agree.

What needs to happen, imo, is to find a way to raise the GDP, lower taxes for the middle and lower classes. The increase in GDP will offset the lowering of taxes. The war needs to be won and won outright and soon.

GDP is an outdated measuring stick for how the economy is faring i.e - GDP goes up when the govt, businesses, and individuals borrow money over their heads, which is what's been happening. Consumerism and wasteful spending has largely attributed to increased GDP lately.

I'm not saying that GDP going up is bad, but the growth needs to be based on something real. A sustainable growth is good. The Enron phony economic growth of the policies we have now ( and to continue under McCain) is just trying to build a house of cards.

clement wrote:The only thing he said, when put on the spot in the last debate, was a vague freeze on increasing spending with the exception of military, veterans, and entitlements. Well that about covers most of the budget.

Maybe he meant cutting foreign aid, too? It's the only thing I can think of that wasn't included in the big three that he listed. What he said was akin to a fat guy saying, "I'm going to start eating healthy, except I'll still eat red meat, fatty foods and soda."

Richie Allen wrote:

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:McCain's POW experience simply can't be overlooked. True, it doesn't make him more or less qualified to be President. It does, however, show that the man is honorable (despite his current campaign actions) and when he chose to stay with his comrades instead of going home when given the chance, that, imo, speaks volumes for his character....more so than a campaign.

Have you guys heard the "smear" on that record? Not what the Obama camp is saying but what anti-McCainites are saying?

He supposedly gave out a lot of very classified information as a POW. And, when it came time to release prisoners, the ones that cooperated were the first to go. He was given the opportunity to leave early, being one who cooperated, but was told by someone here at home that he shouldn't leave because of his father's position and that it would be known that he cooperated if he was one of the first ones out.

Not sure how much, if any, of it is true but it's being circulated (in much greater detail).

Yeah, and I don't believe it. So......esentially this is what they are saying:

McCain gave away info so he wasn't tortured because he put himself about his Country. Yet, he was strong enough to stay in what looks from all accounts to be a hellhole for......his fathers gain. It just doesn't add up.

And, the fact that he is so against all forms of any sort of any torture now - even against his own party - gives credibility to the fact that he knows first hand how horrific it can be.

If this information is coming from his comrades that were there, then it has more credibility, if not, then I just don't buy it. There are people that were there that have said pretty much the same things he has: some info was given to avoid unbearableness, but they largely were treated like [expletive] and tortured regardless of what was going on. And he chose to stay.

clement wrote:If your dad is not wealthy, he's not likely to have any impact on the capital gains tax between the two candidates. McCain wants to keep the highest rate at 15%. Obama wants to raise it to ~20% for only the wealthiest individuals. So if your dad doesn't fall into that category which he evidently does not fall into based on what you've said, neither candidate is likely to be better or worse for you (or your dad) on that issue.

I'll talk to him again. His worry was more not what Obama was saying, but more what a lot of democrats want.....30-32% instead of the 15%. I'll see what he was thinking just to make sure he knows and I know what he's saying.

I'll give you all that the extremely wealthy who are using the stock market as a job should be taxed on it. But, some people just shouldn't be, imo.

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:

Richie Allen wrote:

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:McCain's POW experience simply can't be overlooked. True, it doesn't make him more or less qualified to be President. It does, however, show that the man is honorable (despite his current campaign actions) and when he chose to stay with his comrades instead of going home when given the chance, that, imo, speaks volumes for his character....more so than a campaign.

Have you guys heard the "smear" on that record? Not what the Obama camp is saying but what anti-McCainites are saying?

He supposedly gave out a lot of very classified information as a POW. And, when it came time to release prisoners, the ones that cooperated were the first to go. He was given the opportunity to leave early, being one who cooperated, but was told by someone here at home that he shouldn't leave because of his father's position and that it would be known that he cooperated if he was one of the first ones out.

Not sure how much, if any, of it is true but it's being circulated (in much greater detail).

Yeah, and I don't believe it. So......esentially this is what they are saying:

McCain gave away info so he wasn't tortured because he put himself about his Country. Yet, he was strong enough to stay in what looks from all accounts to be a hellhole for......his fathers gain. It just doesn't add up.

And, the fact that he is so against all forms of any sort of any torture now - even against his own party - gives credibility to the fact that he knows first hand how horrific it can be.

If this information is coming from his comrades that were there, then it has more credibility, if not, then I just don't buy it. There are people that were there that have said pretty much the same things he has: some info was given to avoid unbearableness, but they largely were treated like [expletive] and tortured regardless of what was going on. And he chose to stay.

It really bothers me that it's being brought up. Detestable imo. As I get to know McCain I have come to realize that there is little if anything I respect him for outside of his military service, but I most definitely respect that.

Freed Roger wrote:True, the guy is a hero and appears more credible on military matters than the current president. My obvious disagreement with McCain is his overemphasis on military solutions. It seems like his committment to Iraq is because he feels bad about how Vietnam ended up, more so than Iraq War is a solution to fighting terrorism. The grand dream of making Iraq into a US-friendly democracy in the mideast is a bit naive. I'm a pessimist, Iraq's been a [expletive] hole for a long time. It won't be pretty when we leave, but let it go.

More negotations are needed before the military is used. I agree with that. But, the US shouldn't ever be afraid to use the miliatry because of politics. It's almost like a tale of screw ups when looking at Clinton and Bush. Clinton, imo, wasn't nearly aggressive enough and Bush, imo, was way too aggressive. There has to be a middle ground, but the middle ground, again imo, involves not being afraid to use the military. But, getting bogged down in an expensive quagmire like Iraq (though my friends that are in the military -mostly the AF- are quite pissed at the notion of withdrawal and say it's not a quagmire) should be a LAST, LAST resort and should require the UN backing before doing so in almost all cases. There's a fine line there, and finding it is essential.

Your energy thoughts. I agree.

I wish everyone would see that, and jump on board. There would be initial resistance, largely by the oil companies. But, we're moving at a snails speed forward in an area that requires a pace infinitely faster than where we are now.....

GDP is an outdated measuring stick for how the economy is faring i.e - GDP goes up when the govt, businesses, and individuals borrow money over their heads, which is what's been happening. Consumerism and wasteful spending has largely attributed to increased GDP lately.

I'm not saying that GDP going up is bad, but the growth needs to be based on something real. A sustainable growth is good. The Enron phony economic growth of the policies we have now ( and to continue under McCain) is just trying to build a house of cards.

I agree with that. And, it came out wrong on my part. We need to create jobs. And, the energy market is definitely one of the places where it needs to happen. There are a ton of construction crews sitting around doing nothing right now b/c work has slowed up. Developers/engineers/lawyers/etc need work to do and if the gov. decides to open up a power plant (which I would imagine though I have no idea is a money making venture) in a small town, it's going to be a boom for that area requiring a lot of development. There's a town called Russellville, AR that has a nuclear plant. And, I'm pretty sure that's about all it had. Now there's a college there and it's one of the bigger cities in AR. (Not that that is saying much) But, still, it just goes to show that these plants require so much more than just a set of plans for the construction. There's usually a town that goes up around it.....